DOCSLIB.ORG

Can the Eu Be Held Accountable for Financing Development Projects That Violate Human Rights?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Can the Eu Be Held Accountable for Financing Development Projects That Violate Human Rights? CAN THE EU BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR FINANCING DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT VIOLATE HUMAN RIGHTS? KIRSTEN LEUBE* ABSTRACT The European Union (EU) is one of the largest providers of development cooperation worldwide. The EU proclaims that poverty reduction and the furtherance of individuals’ human rights are among the primary goals of its development aid. However, how does the EU ensure that these goals are actually met? Moreover, what mechanisms does the EU provide in order to address adverse effects its development cooperation might trigger? Given that the EU often provides funds for countries with already weak state structures and often times deplorable human rights records, the possibility that further human rights violations will occur is not far-fetched. For example, from 2007-2010, grave human rights offenses, such as torture, arbitrary detentions, and other forms of mistreatment occurred in Ukrainian detention centers funded through the EU’s Neigbourhood Policy. This Note will focus on the individual and the means the individual has to hold the EU accountable for funding development aid projects that have adverse effects. The starting point for this analysis involves the framing of the EU’s responsibility for funding human rights violations from both the perspective of the law of international responsibility and of international human rights law. Given the legal uncertainties in these areas, the possibilities of judicially holding the EU accountable for funding development projects resulting in human rights violations are very limited. There is huge disparity between the EU’s broadly stated commitments and its obligations towards human rights and the fact that in its development aid efforts, the EU does not have mechanisms in place to ensure that these standards are actually met. Hence, it is high time for the EU to provide for an individual complaints mechanism for affected individuals. I. POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES OF DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION: UNINTENDED ADVERSE EFFECTS AND INADVERTENT HARM TO INDIVIDUALS ...................................... 1245 * Kirsten Leube is a German lawyer and LL.M. graduate of Georgetown University Law Center. As a legal advisor to the German Ministry of Justice, she formerly worked for the Department of International Rule of Law Dialogues, International Legal Cooperation, and is currently working as the assistant to the Vice-President of the UN Human Rights Committee. © 2017, Kirsten A. Leube. 1243 GEORGETOWN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW II. SETTING THE STAGE:THE MYRIAD OF LEGAL SOURCES OF EU DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION.......................... 1247 III. THE EU’S ACCOUNTABILITY IN ITS DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION:THE LAW ON INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND EU’S HUMAN RIGHTS OBLIGATIONS.................. 1250 A. “Accountability”—Who? To Whom? For What? When? How? With Which Consequences? ................... 1250 B. Introducing the Main Players—Who is Accountable to Whom in EU Development Cooperation?............... 1251 C. Legal Accountability Framework—What International Legal Standards Does the EU Have to Answer to?............. 1252 1. The law of international responsibility of states and international organizations is still emerging. ...... 1252 a. DASR vs. DARIO—Which Regime is Applicable to the EU? ............................... 1253 b. EU Law and the DARIO—A Complicated Relation­ ship ................................. 1255 c. Responsibility of the EU under the DARIO ....... 1257 2. EU development cooperation must be in line with the EU’s human rights obligations. ........ 1258 a. Obligation to Adhere to Human Rights According to the EU’s General Human Rights Framework ..... 1258 b. The Emergence of the Extraterritorial Applicability of Human Rights Under International Human Rights Law ............................ 1259 c. The Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Obligations in Development Cooperation. ....... 1260 3. Extent of the EU’s Human Rights Obligations—For What Exactly? .............. 1263 a. Duty to Respect .......................... 1263 b. Duty to Protect .......................... 1263 c. Duty to Fulfill........................... 1265 D. Interim Remarks: The EU’s Responsibility for Funding Projects Resulting in Human Rights Violations.......... 1266 IV. THE NECESSITY FOR AN INDIVIDUAL COMPLAINTS MECHANISM . 1266 A. The EU is Obligated to Provide a Complaints Mechanism under General Human Rights Law and EU Law—With What Consequences? ............................ 1266 B. Judicial Enforceability of EU Human Rights Obligations for Third-Country Individuals ........................ 1267 1. International Court of Justice: Ubi Non Accusator, Ibi Non Judex—No Plaintiff, No Judge .......... 1267 1244 [Vol. 48 EU ACCOUNTABILITY IN HUMAN RIGHTS 2. European Court of Human Rights: A Future Beacon of Hope? .......................... 1270 3. The European Court of Justice: Article 340 in Conjuncture with Article 288 TFEU as the “Saving Grace”?.................................. 1270 4. EU Ombudsman .......................... 1272 V. ALLOWING INDIVIDUALS TO ADDRESS THEIR GRIEVANCES AND WIDENING CHANNELS OF EXISTING GRIEVANCE MECHANISMS.... 1272 I. POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES OF DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION:UNINTENDED ADVERSE EFFECTS AND INADVERTENT HARM TO INDIVIDUALS In February 2015, the German news agency Deutsche Welle un­ earthed major human rights violations against asylum seekers and other migrants in detention centers in Ukraine.1 These violations included severe forms of mistreatment, some of which amounted to torture and arbitrary detentions.2 One Afghan refugee reported being tied to a chair and subsequently subjected to electric shocks by the guards.3 The surprising fact? Most of the detention centers in which these human rights violations occurred were financed in part by the European Union (EU) in the framework of its European Neighbor­ hood and Partnership Financial Cooperation (ENP).4 Between 2007 and 2010, the EU disbursed at least 30 million Euros for the establish­ ment of migrant detention centers in Ukraine.5 The proclaimed aim of this disbursement was to safeguard human rights.6 As early as 2010, Human Rights Watch documented inhumane conditions in the migrant detention centers.7 However, the European Parliament only took action in 2015 after the media reports pointed to 1. Jan D. Walter, Michalski: “EU finanziert Flu¨chtlingslager in Drittla¨ndern,” DEUTSCHE WELLE (Feb. 16, 2015), http://www.dw.com/de/michalski-eu-finanziert-flu¨chtlingslager-in-drittla¨ndern/ a-18261215; Maximilian Popp, “Guantanamo of the East”: Ukraine Locks Up Refugees at EU’s Behest, DER SPIEGEL (Feb. 17, 2015), http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/ukraine-receives-eu­ funds-to-block-asylum-seekers-from-reaching-europe-a-1018907.html#ref=rss. 2. Id. 3. Id. 4. Id. 5. Europa finanziert Flu¨chtlingsgefa¨ngnisse in der Ukraine,PRO ASYL (Feb. 17, 2015), https://www. proasyl.de/news/europa-finanziert-fluechtlingsgefaengnisse-in-der-ukraine/; Ukraine Immigration Detention,GLOBAL DETENTION PROJECT, https://www.globaldetentionproject.org/countries/europe/ ukraine (last updated Dec. 2012). 6. Id. 7. Id. 2017] 1245 GEORGETOWN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW human rights violations in the detention camps.8 Several members of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D), one of the Parliament’s largest groups, launched an inquiry about the situation in March 2015.9 According to the Commission’s answer in September 2015, the aid disbursed in the framework of the ENP was aimed “to bring the facilities in Ukraine in line with European best practices and international humanitarian standards.”10 When asked what measures the Commission took to remedy the situation in which international and European human rights standards were violated with the support of EU taxpayers’ money, the Commission asserted that it supported NGOs dealing with complementary assistance to migrants and with the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the United Na­ tions High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to improve Ukrai­ nian legislation.11 However, the Commission did not suggest that it would take concrete steps to alleviate the situation in the detention centers or to put pressure on the Ukrainian government to end the human rights violations.12 Instead, the Commission stated that it would continue to financially support Ukraine.13 In this context, Human Rights Watch criticized the EU for not having an institution responsible for inspecting the conditions on the ground and assessing whether international human rights standards are upheld.14 The example of the Ukrainian detention centers demon­ strates that, although it may be well intended, in some cases develop­ ment aid can have adverse effects on individuals, even while assisting the beneficiary country in some way.15 In light of these findings, two questions emerge: is the EU accountable for financing development projects that result in human rights violations, and do the EU’s mechanisms suffice to address these violations? 8. Parliamentary Questions, Subject: Violation of Human Rights of Asylum-Seekers, Refugees and Other Migrants in Ukraine, EUR.PARL.DOC. (E-003926/2015) (Mar. 11, 2015), http://www. europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=WQ&reference=E-2015-003926&language=EN. 9. Id. 10. Parliamentary Questions, Answer Given by Vice-President Mogherini on Behalf of the Commission, EUR.PARL.DOC. (E-003926-15) (Sept. 24, 2015), http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=E-2015-003926&language=EN. 11. Id. 12. Id. 13. Id. 14. Walter, supra note 1. 15. Kirsten
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reparation for Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations, 10 TUL
    DATE DOWNLOADED: Wed Sep 29 21:37:28 2021 SOURCE: Content Downloaded from HeinOnline Citations: Bluebook 21st ed. Christian Tomuschat, Reparation for Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations, 10 TUL. J. INT'l & COMP. L. 157 (2002). ALWD 6th ed. Tomuschat, C. ., Reparation for Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations, 10 Tul. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 157 (2002). APA 7th ed. Tomuschat, C. (2002). Reparation for Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations. Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law, 10, 157-184. Chicago 17th ed. Christian Tomuschat, "Reparation for Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations," Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law 10 (2002): 157-184 McGill Guide 9th ed. Christian Tomuschat, "Reparation for Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations" (2002) 10 Tul J Int'l & Comp L 157. AGLC 4th ed. Christian Tomuschat, 'Reparation for Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations' (2002) 10 Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law 157. MLA 8th ed. Tomuschat, Christian. "Reparation for Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations." Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law, 10, 2002, p. 157-184. HeinOnline. OSCOLA 4th ed. Christian Tomuschat, 'Reparation for Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations' (2002) 10 Tul J Int'l & Comp L 157 -- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at https://heinonline.org/HOL/License -- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text. -- To obtain permission to use this article beyond the scope of your license, please use: Copyright Information Reparation for Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations Christian Tomuschaf I.
    [Show full text]
  • Professor Christian Tomuschat
    The Center for Civil and Human Rights presents a series of lectures by PROFESSOR CHRISTIAN TOMUSCHAT Professor Tomuschat is one of the world’s leading international human rights lawyers and emeritus professor of law at Humboldt University, Berlin. He is an experienced international litigator and judge who has served with the United Nations as a member of the Human Rights Committee, the International law Commission, and as an independent expert in Guatemala and Gaza. Monday, February 7, 2011 12:30 p.m. 3140 Eck Hall of Law Germany v. Italy at the ICJ Professor Tomuschat will discuss public aspects of this case in which he serves as one of the agents for Germany in proceedings against Italy before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Hague This lecture co-sponsored by the Nanovic Institute for European Studies. Wednesday, February 9, 2011 12:30 p.m. 3140 Eck Hall of Law Human Rights and the Gaza Conflict Professor Tomuschat will discuss his service on a panel of independent experts tasked by the United Nations to “monitor and assess any domestic, legal or other proceedings undertaken by the Government of Israel and the Palestinian side” in light of the allegations in the report of the UN Independent Fact-Finding Mission into the Gaza conflict – also known as the Goldstone Report. Thursday, February 10, 2011 12:30 p.m. 3140 Eck Hall of Law What is “General International Law”? Professor Tomuschat will lecture on the concept of general international law. Given the multiplicity of subjects and the overlapping areas of activity covered by international law, he will explore whether a common set of rules – collectively known as “general international law” – may be said to exist.
    [Show full text]
  • International Law Commission – Statements by Professor Georg Nolte
    Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Last Updated: February 2016 International Law Commission – Statements by Professor Georg Nolte Table of Contents 67th Session (2015) ....................................................................................................................... 6 3277th Meeting, 23 July 2015 (Provisional Application of Treaties) .................................................... 6 3274th Meeting, 22 July 2015 (Visit by the President of the International Court of Justice) .............. 8 3273rd Meeting, 21 July 2015 (Immunity of State Officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction) ........ 9 3262nd Meeting, 4 June 2015 (Subsequent Agreements and Subsequent Practice) ........................ 13 3260th Meeting, 2 June 2015 (Protection of the Atmosphere) ......................................................... 22 3259th Meeting, 29 May 2015 (Subsequent Agreements and Subsequent Practice) ....................... 23 3256th Meeting, 26 May 2015 (Crimes against Humanity) ............................................................... 26 3253rd Meeting, 20 May 2015 (Identification of Customary International Law) .............................. 29 3252nd Meeting, 19 May (Identification of Customary International Law) ....................................... 31 3249th Meeting, 12 May 2015 (Protection of the Atmosphere) ....................................................... 32 3246th Meeting, 6 May 2015 (Protection of the Atmosphere) ......................................................... 33 3245th Meeting, 5 May 2015 (Statement
    [Show full text]
  • Counter-Memorial of Italy
    INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE CASE CONCERNING JURISDICTIONAL IMMUNITIES OF THE STATE (GERMANY V. ITALY) COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF ITALY 22 DECEMBER 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. GENERAL REMARKS ..................................................................................... 5 Section I. Introduction................................................................................................................. 5 Section II. The Agreement Between the Parties on the Jurisdiction of the Court................. 7 Section III. The Real Scope of the Dispute ................................................................................ 8 Section IV. The Position of the Federal Republic of Germany and its International Responsibility for the Crimes Committed by the Third Reich....................................... 9 Section V. The Time Element in the Present Case.................................................................. 10 CHAPTER II. THE FACTS..................................................................................................... 13 Section I. The Events of the Second World War Concerning the Parties ............................ 13 A. IMPRISONMENT AND FORCED LABOUR OF BOTH ITALIAN MILITARY PERSONNEL AND CIVILIANS.............................................................................................................. 14 B. CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVILIAN POPULATION................................................................. 15 Section II. The Exclusion of Italian Victims from Reparations on the Basis of a Mistaken
    [Show full text]
  • Document on Crimes Against the Environment, Prepared by Mr. Christian Tomuschat, Member of the Commission
    Document:- ILC(XLVIII)/DC/CRD.3 Document on crimes against the environment, prepared by Mr. Christian Tomuschat, member of the Commission Topic: Draft code of crimes against the peace and security of mankind (Part II)- including the draft statute for an international criminal court Extract from the Yearbook of the International Law Commission:- 1996,vol. II(1) Downloaded from the web site of the International Law Commission (http://www.un.org/law/ilc/index.htm) Copyright © United Nations DRAFT CODE OF CRIMES AGAINST THE PEACE AND SECURITY OF MANKIND [Agenda item 3] DOCUMENT ILC(XLVIII)/DC/CRD.3 Document on crimes against the environment, prepared by Mr. Christian Tomuschat, member of the Commission [Original: English] [27 March 1996] CONTENTS Page Multilateral instruments cited in the present report ...................................................................................... 16 Paragraphs INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 1 16 Chapter I. HISTORICAL REVIEW ......................................................................................................... 2−13 17 A. The Nürnberg trial ................................................................................................... 3 17 B. The work done by the International Law Commission ........................................... 4–10 17 C. Work done by other United Nations bodies ............................................................ 11–12 20 D. Work done by private
    [Show full text]
  • EJIL: Talk! – Let Not Triepel Triumph – How to Make the Best out of Sentenza No. 238 of the Italian Constitutional Court for a Global Legal Order
    EJIL: Talk! – Let Not Triepel Triumph – How To Make the Best Out of Sentenza No. 238 of the Italian Constitutional Court for a Global Legal Order Analysis Reports Debate! Book Discussion Editorials About EJIL: Talk! EJIL: Live! Blog of the European Journal EJIL: Talk!of International Law Home EJIL Analysis Let Not Triepel Triumph – How To Make the Best Out of Sentenza No. 238 of the Italian Constitutional Court for a Global Legal Order Let Not Triepel Triumph – How To Make the Best Out of Sentenza No. 238 of the Italian Constitutional Court for a Global Legal Order Published on December 22, 2014 Author: Anne Peters The Italian Constiutional Court’s decision no. 238 of 22 Oct. 2014 (unofficial translation into English) already inspired a flurry of comments in the blogosphere (see in EJIL talk! Christian Tams (24 Oct. 2014) and Theodor Schilling (12 Nov. 2014); on the Verfassungsblog amongst others Filippo Fontanelli (27 Oct. 2014); on Opinio Juris Andrea Pin (19 Nov. 2014); on the Völkerrechtsblog Felix Würkert (11 Dec. 2014)); see also Karin Oellers-Frahm, „Das italienische Verfassungsgericht und das Völkerrecht: Eine unerfreuliche Beziehung“, Heidelberg Journal of International Law 2015, issue 1. In that Sentenza, the Corte refused to give effect to the ICJ’s judgment (in) Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy) of 3 February 2012, in which the ICJ had upheld the principle of state immunity against allegations of serious human rights violations of German state organs committed during the Second World War. Sentenza No. 238 is important not only because it concerns the persisting tension between respecting (state) immunity and protecting human or fundamental rights (see for a recent publication Anne Peters/Evelyne Lagrange/Stefan Oeter/Christian Tomuschat (eds), Immunities in the Age of Global Constitutionalism (Leiden: Brill 2015)), but – maybe even more importantly – because it concerns the relationship between international law (in the shape of a judgment by the ICJ) and domestic law, as applied by a domestic (constitutional) court.
    [Show full text]
  • Allocation of Law Enforcement Authority in the International System. Proceedings of an International Symposium of the Kiel Insti
    Allocation of Law Enforcement Authority in the International System Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Internationales Recht an der Universität Kiel Herausgegeben von Jost Delbrück Institut für Internationales Recht an der Universität Kiel 117 Völkerrechtlicher Beirat des Instituts: Daniel Bardonnet John Norton Moore l'Universite de Paris ll University of Virginia, Charlottesville Rodoll Bernhardt Max-Planck-Institut für Fred L. Morrison ausländisches öffentliches University of Minnesota, Recht und Völkerrecht, Minneapolis Heidelberg Albrecht Randelzhofer Lucius Caflisch Freie Universität Berlin Institut Universitaire de Hautes Krzysztof Skubiszewski Etudes Internationales, Geneve Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw and Poznan Antonius Eitel Bonn Christian Tomuschat Universität Bonn Luigi Ferrari Bravo Universita di Roma Rüdiger Wolfrum Max-Planck-Institut für Louis Benkin ausländisches öffentliches Columbia University, Recht und Völkerrecht, New York Heidelberg Tommy T. B. Koh Sir Artbur Watts Washington, D. C. London Allocation of Law Enforcement Authority in the International System Proceedings of an International Symposium of the Kiel Institute of International Law March 23 to 25, 1994 Edited by Jost Delbrück Assistant Editor: Ursula E. Heinz Duncker & Humblot · Berlin Die Deutsche Bibliothek - CIP-Einheitsaufnahme Allocation of law enforcement authority in the international system : proceedings of an international symposium of the Kiel Institute of International Law, March 23 to 25, 1994 I ed. by Jost Delbrück. - Berlin : Duncker und Humblot, 1995 (Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Internationales Recht an der Universität Kiel ; 117) ISBN 3-428-08335-0 NE: Delbrück, Jost [Hrsg.]; Institut für Internationales Recht (Kiel): Veröffentlichungen des Instituts ... Alle Rechte, einschließlich das der Übersetzung, vorbehalten. Ohne ausdrückliche Genehmigung des Verlages ist es nicht gestattet, das Buch oder Teile daraus in irgendeiner Weise zu vervielfältigen.
    [Show full text]
  • Immunities in the Age of Global Constitutionalism
    Immunities in the Age of Global Constitutionalism Edited by Anne Peters Evelyne Lagrange Stefan Oeter Christian Tomuschat LEIDEN | BOSTON This is a digital offfprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV Contents Foreword ix Alain Pellet and Daniel Thürer List of Contributors x 1 Immune against Constitutionalisation? 1 Anne Peters PART 1 State Immunity—National Practice 2 L’immunité souveraine de l’État : la pratique française 23 Pierre Boussaroque et David Lemétayer 3 Sovereign Immunities of States: A German Perspective 32 Martin Ney 4 Current Polish Practice in the Domain of State Immunity 40 Władysław Czapliński 5 The Holy See, a Former Somalian Prime Minister, and a Confijiscated Pissarro Painting: Recent US Case Law on Foreign Sovereign Immunity 51 Thomas Giegerich 6 La renonciation par un État à son immunité d’exécution 70 Mathias Audit PART 2 State Immunity before the ICJ—The Case Germany v. Italy 7 The Case of Germany v. Italy before the ICJ 87 Christian Tomuschat This is a digital offfprint for restricted use only | © 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV vi Contents 8 Remedies of Victims of War Crimes and Crimes against Humanities: Some Critical Remarks on the ICJ’s Judgment on the Jurisdictional Immunity of States 99 Michael Bothe 9 L’afffaireAllemagne contre Italie ou les dilemmes du droit et de la justice 116 Jerzy Kranz PART 3 Commercial Activities and State Immunity 10 Blurring Boundaries between Sovereign Acts and Commercial Activities: A Functional View on Regulatory Immunity and Immunity from Execution 131 Anne van
    [Show full text]
  • Stanford Law School, Stanford, California, Master of the Science of Law (JSM)
    M ARKUS W AGNER University of Miami School of Law – 1311 Miller Drive, Coral Gables, FL 33146 ( 305) 284-1129 – [email protected] PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE University of Miami School of Law, Coral Gables, Florida January 2009 – present Associate Professor of Law Courses: Constitutional Law, International Law, International Economic Law, Comparative Law, Miami-Leipzig Seminar Service: Entry-level Hiring Committee (2010-2011); Scholarship Committee (2011-2012); Graduate Programs Committee (2011-2012); Faculty Advisor, Middle-Eastern Law Students Association (2009-2011); Faculty Advisor, National Security & Armed Conflict Law Review (2011-2012); Faculty Senate Administrative Services Committee (2012-present). Visiting professor / visiting scholar Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, Bogota / Colombia 2011-present Max Planck Institute for Public International Law, Heidelberg / Germany May – August 2013 University of New South Wales Law School, Sydney / Australia July – August 2012 University of Leipzig, Faculty of Law, Leipzig / Germany May – July 2011 Southwest University of Political Science and Law, Chongqing / China June 2013 – present Senior Research Fellow, Center for Teaching and Research of WTO Disputes Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, Brussels / Belgium January – July 2007 Legal Consultant Supreme Court of Israel, Jerusalem / Israel June – September 2006 Law Clerk, President emeritus, Honorable Aharon Barak Max Planck Institute for International Law, Heidelberg / Germany July 2002 – July 2005 Research Fellow,
    [Show full text]
  • Biographical Notes
    Bureau of the Court - Biographical Notes (in alphabetical order) updated: 22 February 2021 Emmanuel DECAUX President Emmanuel Decaux is Professor emeritus of the University of Paris II – Panthéon-Assas, where he taught public international law and international human rights law. He was also Director of the Doctorate School of international law, European law, International Relations and Comparative Law. He has published on topics of public international law, international organizations, with a focus on peaceful settlement of disputes and human rights. He is also a member of the Advisory Board of the Security and Human Rights Monitor publication. In addition to his academic career, Emmanuel Decaux held several functions within the United Nations. He was a member and then President of the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances between 2011 and 2019. Prior to that, he was a member of the UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and a member of the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee. Emmanuel Decaux also participated as a member of the French delegation to the three meetings of the Human Dimension Conference (1989-1991) and to the first Human Dimension Implementation meetings organized by the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights in Warsaw. Later he was nominated as an expert as part of the framework of the Moscow Mechanism on Human Dimension on behalf of which he acted twice (in 2003 and 2011) as Rapporteur. 1 Erkki KOURULA Vice-President Judge Kourula holds two degrees (LL.M. and LL.Lic.) in law from the University of Helsinki and a doctorate in international law from the University of Oxford.
    [Show full text]
  • Shaping Communities. Building Bridges. Promoting Dialogue. Corporate Social Responsibility in 2004
    DaimlerChrysler Shaping communities. Building bridges. Promoting dialogue. Corporate Social Responsibility in 2004 DaimlerChrysler AG External Affairs and Public Policy Stuttgart (Germany), Washington (USA) www.daimlerchrysler.com Corporate Social Responsibility 2004 Corporate Social Responsibility 04< DaimlerChrysler Corporate Social Responsibility >>Glossary + Acknowledgements 99 Contents Acknowledgements Editorial 4 sustainability first became apparent five years later, at the 1992 Published by Areas of activity 6 Rio Earth Summit. DaimlerChrysler AG D – 70546 Stuttgart, Germany >>Sustainable development According to the Brundtland Com- Auburn Hills, MI 48326-2766, USA Challenges facing a citizen of the world 8 mission (see Sustainability above), the main characteristics of sus- >1. tainable development are the satisfaction of the basic needs of Under the charge of Taking responsibility 10 the world’s poor in particular, and the pursuit of a development DaimlerChrysler AG Globalization – a human perspective 12 model that preserves the planet’s limited resources for future gen- Dr. Michael J. Inacker Transatlantic dialogue 14 erations. Vice President External Affairs and Public Policy - Stuttgart - >2. The proactive workplace 16 HPC 1134 A corporate culture that puts people first 18 >>UNEP United Nations Environmental Program. The United D – 70546 Stuttgart, Germany Nations’ environmental protection organization, based in Nairobi. >3. Working sustainably 24 Project managed and coordinated by Mission objective: environmental protection 26 >>UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural DaimlerChrysler AG Powering mobility in the future 28 Organization. United Nations agency responsible for the promo- Wolfram Heger Global Sustainability Cooperative 30 tion of culture and education. HPC 1134 D – 70546 Stuttgart, Germany >4. Moving around in safety 34 >>WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development.
    [Show full text]
  • International Law Seminar Alumni Conference 2019
    INTERNATIONAL LAW SEMINAR ALUMNI CONFERENCE 2019 FRIDAY 19 JULY 2019 ROOM VII, PALAIS DES NATIONS, GENEVA PROGRAMME Time Session Speakers Verity Robson (2017), President of ILSAN and Legal Counsellor at Permanent Mission of the United Kingdom in Geneva 13:00 Welcome Remarks Vittorio Mainetti, Secretary-General of ILSAN and Coordinator of International Law Seminar Marja Lehto (1993), Member of ILC, Senior Expert for Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland and Associate Professor at University of Helsinki Jasmine Moussa (2009), First Secretary at Permanent Mission of Egypt in Geneva Shinya Murase (1975), Member of ILC and Professor Emeritus of Jochi Panel 1: 13:15 University in Tokyo International Law and the Environment Gentian Zyberi (2008), Head of Department at Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, Professor at University of Oslo and Member of Human Rights Committee Moderator: Marcelo Kohen (1989), Professor of International Law at Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva 15:00 Tea and Coffee Christian Tomuschat (1966), Professor Emeritus, Humboldt University of 15:30 Keynote Address Berlin Antonios Abou Kasm (2009), Director and Professor of International Law at Lebanese University Mónica Feria-Tinta (2000), Barrister, 20 Essex Street Chambers Panel 2: 15:50 Procedural Issues in Philippe Gautier (1988), Registrar of the International Tribunal for the Law International of the Sea Dispute Settlement Raul Pangalangan (1988), Judge of the International Criminal Court Moderator: Brian McGarry (2013), Lecturer and Senior Researcher at Geneva Centre for International Dispute Settlement Mary-Elisabeth Chong (2017), Vice-President (Conferences & Seminars) 17:35 Concluding Remarks of ILSAN and State Counsel at Attorney General’s Chambers of Singapore th 18:00 Reception, Delegates’ Restaurant (8 Floor, Palais des Nations) SPEAKERS Antonios Abou Kasm (2009) Antonios F.
    [Show full text]